Worldbuilding and SF/Fantasy's self-loathing
Posted 25th June 2012 at 09:39 AM by J-WO
Over on me blog I've posted about the current vogue for disdaining secondary worlds. Came out a lot bitchier than I thought it would, but I don't believe in self-censorship, so...
Total Comments 19
Comments
-
Bitchy? Some might think so but I think you said what others arguing would be afraid to say. I don't believe in censorship at all-a person should always be allowed to say whatever he/she is thinking.
And for the record, I disagree with Harrison. Worldbuilding, I feel, is necessary, at least for the fantasy genre, if it's not going to take place on a modern Earth setting. Even with alternative history, you have to fill in the gaps of the period you're choosing to write about.
And his later argument? It sounded like a weak attempt to pacify whoever might have gone up in flames over his anti-worldbuilding views. Again, I disagree with him here in that to be convincing, worldbuilding can NOT be done in a single sentence. You might be able to get a single character's view of CURRENT landscape out of a single sentence, nothing more. That's not nearly enough to develop a world. It shows no history of the world, no reason why the character is doing what they are doing, it doesn't show what the threat to that world is, or where it came from. It doesn't show what's beyond the next mountain range, unless that "one sentence" stretches out to a paragraph length.
No, what Harrison's viewpoints are, are a punishment to us "nerds" by the "cool" crowd that have been going on since the dawn of comic books, and I for one, am sick of such arrogance.Posted 25th June 2012 at 05:51 PM by Karn Maeshalanadae
- Bitchy? Some might think so but I think you said what others arguing would be afraid to say. I don't believe in censorship at all-a person should always be allowed to say whatever he/she is thinking.
And for the record, I disagree with Harrison. Worldbuilding, I feel, is necessary, at least for the fantasy genre, if it's not going to take place on a modern Earth setting. Even with alternative history, you have to fill in the gaps of the period you're choosing to write about.
And his later argument? It sounded like a weak attempt to pacify whoever might have gone up in flames over his anti-worldbuilding views, simply to save face. Again, I disagree with him here in that to be convincing, worldbuilding can NOT be done in a single sentence. You might be able to get a single character's view of CURRENT landscape out of a single sentence, nothing more. That's not nearly enough to develop a world. It shows no history of the world, no reason why the character is doing what they are doing, it doesn't show what the threat to that world is, or where it came from. It doesn't show what's beyond the next mountain range, unless that "one sentence" stretches out to a paragraph length.
No, what Harrison's viewpoints are, are a punishment to us "nerds" by the "cool" crowd that have been going on since the dawn of comic books, and I for one, am sick of such arrogance.Posted 25th June 2012 at 05:51 PM by Karn Maeshalanadae -
Thanks, Karn, old chap (or is it chapette? I think its amazing we live in an age where a lot of our pals are androgynous and we all take it for granted).
And, yeah, Harrison has a bit of a history with rubbing 'the nerds' faces in it. He's always making a thing about his mountain climbing and how others in the SF con community couldn't do it if they tried.Posted 25th June 2012 at 07:10 PM by J-WO -
Aleister Crowley was also a mountaineer and writer of speculative fiction, with a superb command of the English language, who always knew he was right and showed no compunction in telling other people they were idiots.
Coincidence? OR TIME TRAVEL???!?!!??Posted 25th June 2012 at 09:42 PM by HareBrain -
I find this part of his "clarification" interesting:
First he complains about all the bits of this world that worldbuilders like to use, and then he seems to complain that they want to do is get away from this world. Excuse me? Or does he mean to point out the contradiction? If so, then he should ... you know ... point out that there is a contradiction.Quote:The same few stolen cultures & bits of history, the same few biomes, the same few ideas about things. It’s a big bag but there isn’t much in it. With deftness, economy of line, good design, compression & use of modern materials, you could ram it full of stuff. You could really build a world. But for all the talk, that’s not what that kind of fantasy wants. It wants to get away from a world. This one.
I like your post a lot. It doesn't sound bitchy at all. Or at least not bitchier than the articles that inspired it.
(Karn's a he. Jane Austen wrote about Mansfield Park, not "Manor Park." Otherwise, you're good.)
Knowing what one knows about Crowley that could open up all sorts of interesting speculations.Quote:Originally Posted by HareBrainCoincidence? OR TIME TRAVEL???!?!!??
Best not to go there.
.
.
.Posted 25th June 2012 at 09:52 PM by Teresa Edgerton
Updated 25th June 2012 at 10:13 PM by Teresa Edgerton - Quote:Originally Posted by J-WO
Thanks, Karn, old chap (or is it chapette? I think its amazing we live in an age where a lot of our pals are androgynous and we all take it for granted).
And, yeah, Harrison has a bit of a history with rubbing 'the nerds' faces in it. He's always making a thing about his mountain climbing and how others in the SF con community couldn't do it if they tried.
Yes, I am a male. Beyond that...see, my reasoning on not doing extreme sports, or even more mundane, general sports like football and baseball, is that....why put yourself in greater risk of serious physical injury? Just hearing and seeing some stories of what happen to people when they fall off cliff faces, get caught in avalanches, or what can happen if a 90 mph fastball cracks you on the cranium...no thank you. Not that my diet does my body any favors, but the way I eat hasn't caused me immediate death. There'll probably arise some debate somewhere about the whole thing, but hey, I'm still alive, and I've had bad enough luck without putting slippery boards on my feet and rushing down ten thousand feet of snow and rock.Posted 25th June 2012 at 11:00 PM by Karn Maeshalanadae - I've been trying all this time to think how this relates to writing fantasy. I mean, MJH can't squeeze a fully-formed human being out through his (non-existant*) vagina, but do those of us who can (or have) mock him on that account?Quote:Originally Posted by J-WOHe's always making a thing about his mountain climbing and how others in the SF con community couldn't do it if they tried.
Men always make much of the demanding physical sports they engage in, but try carrying around a bloody great parasite inside your body, with all the attendant risks of hyperemesis gravidarum, thrombocytopenic purpura and pre-eclampsia for several months!
*I assumePosted 26th June 2012 at 12:07 AM by Teresa Edgerton - Thanks for the comments, guys.
Teresa- thanks for pointing out the Austen doozey. I fixed it in quick time. Can't believe that I ran through the blog several times and missed it. I put it down to watching a Brit crime movie just before typing ('manor' being cockney-speak for a crime lord's area). Hmm... if it worked for Pride & Prejudice & Zombies...
Very funny post, BTW.
Men always make much of the demanding physical sports they engage in, but try carrying around a bloody great parasite inside your body, with all the attendant risks of hyperemesis gravidarum, thrombocytopenic purpura and pre-eclampsia for several months!
If you don't mind I think I'll pass!Posted 26th June 2012 at 02:29 PM by J-WO - Men have no stamina.Quote:Originally Posted by J-WO ]If you don't mind I think I'll pass!
(That's why they take up relatively easy activities, like mountain climbing.)Posted 27th June 2012 at 06:17 AM by Teresa Edgerton - But we can put out a small fire without any outside help, and after all, isn't that what Mastery of the World should be based on?Posted 27th June 2012 at 07:32 AM by HareBrain
- I can't even do that. I define masculinity by the ability to quote Monty Python sketches in their entirety. Luckily, women have got all the other bases covered.Posted 28th June 2012 at 04:03 PM by J-WO
- If that were true, it would prove that men are the true rulers, for is not uselessness pretty much the defining characteristic of any ruling class?
Anyway, that's enough self-deprecatory humour. I have parallel parking to do.Posted 28th June 2012 at 04:37 PM by HareBrain - Going back to your blog article and some of the links, Jim, I found this statement by Damien G. Walter of interest:
I haven't read anything by Harrison except the Viriconium books and short stories, but if Harrison's dystopian far future earth is not a secondary world, then neither is Tolkien's Middle Earth, which is supposed to take place in our equally distant past.Quote:I think what might be fairly said about secondary worlds is that they have a tendency to generate terrible, terrible writing.
So has the creation of a secondary world generated terrible, terrible writing in Harrison's case? I would presume that those who flock to agree with him would say not.
My own take is that it is terrible writing that generates terrible worldbuilding, just as it generates terrible characterization and terrible everything else.
The kind of writing that I think Harrison is particularly on about, with his comments about "the great clomping foot of nerdism," is writing overly influenced by role playing games. These books have "magic systems" instead of magic, and worlds that are hammered together out of weathered planks (scarred and battered by previous use) rather than grown organically, and I can practically see the writer rolling dice behind the scenes during every battle.
But these are quite unlike the secondary worlds created by a Tad Williams or a Tanith Lee.
That's because writers like Williams and Lee start with stories and create worlds around them, rather than starting with the world and then plunking down a story inside it.
Even Tolkien, though we tend to think of him as creating Middle Earth first and then writing the stories, was working on both simultaneously right up until the end of his life.Posted 30th June 2012 at 03:24 AM by Teresa Edgerton
Updated 30th June 2012 at 08:02 AM by Teresa Edgerton - Teresa- It's an organic process, Tolkien being the archetypical example.
But I like to think there are exceptions to the story-first-world-second rule. In my own case, a lot of the stories I've done (actually, now I come to think of it, all the stories I've sent into your Doctor's office) have their roots in a spaceship boardgame a university pal of mine used to tinker with. I kept coming up with alien cultures/ space nations etc and kept working on them long after the last die rolled.
Actually, though it may seem counter-intuitive, perhaps war games/ board games are superior in this regard, but they get overlooked, in terms of inspiration, because roleplaying games have all the character sheets, magic systems and immersive storytelling. Whereas war games give one enough to be inspired but not hemmed in.
Hmm... maybe there's a blog post in this.Posted 1st July 2012 at 12:38 PM by J-WO - You're coming up with the cultures yourself, Jim, rather than recycling the characters, creatures, or situations from a handbook. Think of all the people who come here who say they want more information on (fill in blank), when they don't want an overview of the mythologies surrounding whatever it is, but a further explanation of the creature as some gaming guru has interpreted it and (for thousands of gamers) written the attributes of the creature into stone.
So, yes, I think your boardgame is a very different thing. You're inventing your own cultures (which is a kind of story-telling) rather than using something visibly cobbled together out of other people's worlds and cultures.Posted 1st July 2012 at 07:33 PM by Teresa Edgerton - Yep, Masquerade ruined the vampire myth. Every bloodsucker now has to be affiliated with a vampire clan or whatever.
Anyway, thanks for the comments, guys! I've linked from the article to here because of all the interesting insight.Posted 2nd July 2012 at 08:05 AM by J-WO - Wow, I just read the article by Wax Banks (if that is indeed his name) following the link on your blog.
What an unpleasant mind he must have to ascribe all those ulterior motives to the act of worldbuilding. Such horrid little egotists as we apparently must be.
He's missed the point of worldbuilding entirely. The reason we create detailed secondary worlds is because (to borrow a phrase from Ursula K. LeGuin) they give us "pleasure and delight." As simple as that. It's our own little creative quirk. Not everyone finds joy in the same things; some people find it in writing scathing little articles purporting to offer insight into the minds of people they don't even know exist.
But some of us take pleasure in worldbuilding. It seems an innocent diversion to me.Posted 8th July 2012 at 07:27 AM by Teresa Edgerton - Very well said. It makes you wonder why something so harmless invites such scorn.Posted 8th July 2012 at 04:07 PM by J-WO
- n fact, on twitter, someone actually compared me to a heroin dealer. I kid you not!Posted 10th July 2012 at 04:34 PM by J-WO
